Campaigns, Media, & Actions

If shale gas development is so safe, why are so many jurisdictions questioning it?, The Daily Gleaner

06 June 2015

Hits: 1299

JIM EMBERGER COMMENTARY

The Opposition Energy critic says that the discontinuation of the Energy Institute will stop the examination of the science surrounding shale gas. Energy Minister Donald Arseneault says that New Brunswick’s shale commission could approve development. Neither of these two political smokescreens reflects the actual rigorous scientific examinations of shale gas occurring elsewhere.

Lengthy and exhaustive reviews have recently been completed in four jurisdictions. All those jurisdictions then enacted bans or moratoria.

New Brunswickers know that our neighbours, Quebec and Nova Scotia, passed lasting moratoria following their reviews. The state of Maryland just enacted an additional two and a half year moratorium based on a review conducted by their highly regarded university system’s public health school.

But the most thorough review was undertaken by the state of New York. It had already declared a moratorium based on a previous public health review. Last week, after completing a seven-year environmental impact statement (EIS), they essentially banned shale development. All these jurisdictions reached similar conclusions, but New York’s extraordinary effort deserves quoting.

The EIS concluded that the scientific evidence showed:

•“Significant uncertainty remains regarding the level of risk to public health and the environment that would result from permitting high-volume hydraulic fracturing”

•“In fact, the uncertainty regarding the potential significant adverse environmental and public health impacts has been growing over time”

In other words, there are many serious risks needing much more study, the number and severity of the risks is continually increasing, and the effectiveness of mitigation and control efforts are questionable.

Most of the hundreds of scientific papers supporting these conclusions about risk can be found in two places and are periodically updated:

• a compendium by the Concerned Health Professionals of NY at http://bit. ly/1t8E2bo

Since these reviews, alarming studies covering health effects, wastewater disposal, water well contamination, air pollution, radon, and earthquakes continue to appear weekly.

One such comes from medical research about “endocrine disruptors.” These are chemicals that in minuscule quantities act on the body’s hormone system, causing developmental, immune system and reproductive diseases.Children and pregnant women are particularly at risk.

A new review ( http://bit.ly/1yqfJvj ) of the science about them concluded,“Many of the air and water pollutants found near [Unconventional Oil and Gas] operation sites are recognized as being developmental and reproductive toxicants, and therefore there is a compelling need to increase our knowledge of the potential health consequences for adults, infants, and children from these chemicals.”

Another study ( http://bit.ly/1CMad kk ) found that several endocrine-disrupting chemicals commonly used in gas production caused disease at a tiny fraction of the levels considered“safe”by current standards. It also found that levels of these chemicals in the “air near oil and gas development can be orders of magnitude higher than exposures for which we found health effects.”

As to the questionable effectiveness of mitigation efforts, the Council of Canadian Academies already noted that neither the government nor industry adequately monitor shale development. Therefore, without scientific data, no jurisdiction can claim its “world-class” regulations are based on science. Industry-defined“best practices”are not scientific guarantees of safety or effectiveness.

The clear trends in the scientific review of shale gas are the increased identification of risks, and the resulting increase in bans and moratoriums. The few studies that our Energy Institute could complete in our one-year moratorium would have little effect on trends based on hundreds of studies. The institute’s reputable scientists deserve thanks for doing some worthwhile baseline studies, but existing departments such as Environment and Health can direct such research.

The institute had a problem beyond its ethically questionable founding by the former PC government and the now discredited Dr. LaPierre. If it had been intended to be an “energy” institute, its mandate would have been to examine all energy options and help choose the best one,rather than to simply make shale gas palatable to the citizenry.

Our current commission,staffed by volunteers, with only a travel budget and a less-than-one-year window, will work in the shadows of jurisdictions who conducted multi-year reviews with paid researchers, multimillion-dollar budgets, and extensive human resources.

It is almost inconceivable that our commission could reach a different conclusion. To contradict the now well-established scientific evidence of unacceptable risk, it would require truly extraordinarily difficult public explanations and levels of proof.

JIM EMBERGER is a spokesman for the New Brunswick Anti-Shale Gas Alliance.

Action Alerts

The EOS Board of Directors has written an open letter to the Government of New Brunswick urging more climate action and is seeking support from other environmental organizations and members of the public who would like to sign a pledge. Responding to a recent report from the International Panel on Climate Change and New Brunswick’s commitment to emission reductions, EOS Eco-Energy (EOS) is encouraged that the Government has adopted the document, “Transitioning to a Low-Carbon Economy: New Brunswick’s Climate Change Action Plan”. This plan was created by and for New Brunswickers. However, the EOS Board of Directors strongly recommends that a goal-oriented timeline accompany the plan to track progress of those targets set out for 2030. And, in order that the plan be fully implemented, it is necessary that the Government promptly support a fair price-on-carbon program.

EOS welcomes the public and other environmental groups to pledge support for requesting the Government of New Brunswick actively pursue the implementation of its plan, “Transitioning to a Low-Carbon Economy: New Brunswick’s Climate Change Action Plan” by (1) prioritizing and creating a timeline for each action and by publicly reporting CO2 emissions reductions annually, starting with a report in 2020; and (2) by adopting a fair carbon pollution-pricing plan before 2020. Those who sign on also pledge to support a fair carbon pricing plan for New Brunswick residents, organizations, industry, and businesses.

Do you know an individual or organization that has demonstrated excellence in land conservation in our province? Nominations for the 2018 Lieutenant-Governor’s Award for Excellence in Land Conservation are open until Monday, October 1, 2018.

Successful nominees will have a significant impact on land conservation in New Brunswick through leadership, direct action, and long-term involvement as well as other significant contributions. Eligible nominees may include any individuals or organizations involved in stewardship, volunteerism, donation of lands, or building effective partnerships and must meet at least one of the following criteria:

An individual or entity who has contributed in a sustained manner over a significant period of time;

An individual or entity who has contributed significantly in a relatively short amount of time;

A donor of funds or property;

A volunteer, steward and/or member of the Nature Trust of New Brunswick;

A corporate or community partner of the Nature Trust of New Brunswick;

An individual who contributed significantly in the past and should be recognized posthumously.

About

The New Brunswick Environmental Network (NBEN), established in 1991, is a communication network that links together over a 100 non-profit environmental organizations.

The role of the NBEN is to improve communication and co-operation among environmental groups and between these groups, government and other sectors. The NBEN provides educational opportunities for its member and associate groups and encourages the growth of the environmental movement in New Brunswick. The NBEN is not an advocacy group and does not take positions on any issue.